Anas' Expos�...Judges Accused Of Bribery Fight Back; Sue Judicial Council & CJ
Peacefmonline.com can authoritatively confirm that some of the judges and magistrates accused of bribery have challenged the action by the Judicial Council to suspend them saying the Disciplinary Committee that handed down the ruling is "bereft of jurisdiction".
The scandal, a product of ace investigative journalist, Anas Aremeyaw Anas' latest exposé, which broke out last Wednesday, has gripped media headlines all over the country.
It is alleged that another judge took 10,000 cedis to hurriedly dismiss a case against another suspect. More than 34 judges were captured on camera but some of them blatantly refused to be compromised.
A five member disciplinary committee was thus set up by the Chief Justice, Georgina Woode to investigate the video evidence.
These shocking revelations notwithstanding, 14 out of the 22 implicated judges are unhappy with how the CJ insituted disciplinary action against them.
They are 6 Circuit Court Judges; Emmanuel Kofi Sunu, Benjamin Yaw Osei, Kodwo Filson, Seyram Tsatsu Azumah, Isaac Akwantey and Florence Ninepence. The 8 others who are District Magistrates comprise Jacob Amponsah, Alfred K.A Mensah, Albert Zoogah, Isaac Amoah, Michael Gyamfi Boamah, Paul Alhassah, Stephen Assure and William Baffoae
In a statement of claim filed by Lawyer Charles K. Bentum of Bentum, Amoah & Co on behalf of the 6 Circuit Court Judges and 8 District Magistrates at the Fast Track High Court, the plaintiffs are seeking:
i) declaration that the disciplinary proceedings by the Judicial Council against the plaintiffs’ is contrary to law and/or due process.
ii) declaration that the panel constituted by the Chief Justice to institute disciplinary proceedings against plaintiffs has no legal basis and therefore null and void.
The 14 judges argued in their writ that the investigative committee set up by the Chief Justice to investigate the corruption allegations against them, does not have the locus to do so. “… In so far as the power to conduct disciplinary proceedings against the plaintiffs is by law vested in a judge of the High Court or some judicial officer appointed for the purpose by the Chief Justice, the current disciplinary committee is bereft of jurisdiction to investigate the plaintiffs.”
The plaintiffs further averred that the letter from the Judicial Council which asked them to respond to Anas’ video, was dated 4th September, 2015, but was only delivered to them on 8th September. The said letter asked them to respond to the allegations in the video, also on 8th September, the same day the letter was delivered to them. They argue that they were not given ample time to respond to the said allegations by the journalist while the Council proceeded to with the suspension.
“Plaintiffs contend that in so far as the penalty attached to the misconduct alleged against them depended on whether the proceedings were summary or formal, plaintiffs were entitled to be informed of the nature of the proceedings against them.”
<<Print>>